Scientific Proof versus Legal Proof: Ruminations about Mathematical and Statistical Reasoning in Legal Factfinding

Maya Bar-Hillel

Discussion Paper Series from The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem

Abstract: Scientists try to find out the truth about our world. Judges in a court of law try to find out the truth about the target events in the indictment. What are the similarities, and what are the differences, in the procedures that govern the search for truth in these two systems? In particular, why are quantitative tools the hallmark of science, whereas in courts they are rarely used, and when used, are prone to error?

Pages: 17 pages
Date: 2010-05
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://ratio.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/publications/dp548.pdf (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 404 Not Found (http://ratio.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/publications/dp548.pdf [302 Moved Temporarily]--> https://ratio.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/publications/dp548.pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:huj:dispap:dp548

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Paper Series from The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael Simkin ().